UKRAINIAN HISTORICAL SCIENCE IN THE SECOND POLISH REPUBLIC: INSTITUTIONAL ASPECT

. The purpose of the study is to reconstruct the institutional structure of the Ukrainian historical science in the Second Polish Republic. The methodologiical foundation of the study is an interdisciplinary approach. Primarily, it is a structural-functional systemic analysis of historiographical facts and a comparative historical method, based on the principle of objectivity and historicism. We also apply the methods of periodisation, classification and typologisation. The scientific novelty of this article is the complex analysis of the institutional history of the Ukrainian Humanities during the times of interwar Poland. The Conclusions . The Ukrainian scientists in the interwar Poland sometimes collaborated with the Polish government, however, mostly, they opposed its national cultural policy. Regardless the dynamics of their relationship, they managed to adapt to the existing conditions quite well. They preserved the existing institutional potential of the Ukrainian Humanities, while adequately reacting to social political and cultural challenges. Despite a chronical poverty and lack of financial resources, they initiated the foundation of new organisational structures that were designed to moderate the most dynamic branches of the Ukrainian studies. Another peculiar feature was that the Ukrainian science of those times was divided between Warsaw and Lviv. Unfortunately, despite the presence of an active communication between Galician and Dnipro scholars in emigration, they did not manage to establish a solid interinstitutional collaboration. As a result, some organisational structures just obtained their “twins”, which, if we consider scarce financial and human resources, led to unjustified expenses. Moreover, it led to incoherence in scientific projects and thus, to personal conflicts. Nevertheless, those institutions were of a crucial importance, as the emigrants later relocated them to the countries of the “free world”. That helped the Ukrainian science to survive the communist regime and preserve the institutional memory.


Ukrainian historical science in the Second Polish Republic: institutional aspect
is the complex analysis of the institutional history of the Ukrainian Humanities during the times of interwar Poland. The Conclusions. The Ukrainian scientists in the interwar Poland sometimes collaborated with the Polish government, however, mostly, they opposed its national cultural policy. Regardless the dynamics of their relationship, they managed to adapt to the existing conditions quite well. They preserved the existing institutional potential of the Ukrainian Humanities, while adequately reacting to social political and cultural challenges. Despite a chronical poverty and lack of financial resources, they initiated the foundation of new organisational structures that were designed to moderate the most dynamic branches of the Ukrainian studies. Another peculiar feature was that the Ukrainian science of those times was divided between Warsaw and Lviv. Unfortunately, despite the presence of an active communication between Galician and Dnipro scholars in emigration, they did not manage to establish a solid interinstitutional collaboration. As a result, some organisational structures just obtained their "twins", which, if we consider scarce financial and human resources, led to unjustified expenses. Moreover, it led to incoherence in scientific projects and thus, to personal conflicts. Nevertheless, those institutions were of a crucial importance, as the emigrants later relocated them to the countries of the "free world". That helped the Ukrainian science to survive the communist regime and preserve the institutional memory. The Statement of the Problem. Historiographical studies of the last thirty years have been particularly interested in different aspects of the development of the Ukrainian science in the Second Polish Republic. Among these studies, we often come across the works of Western Ukrainian scientists, who demonstrated special interest in the subject, unlike their colleagues from Dnipro Ukraine. However, those are the works on Personality studies that still dominate in the field. The articles on institutional problematics are not that frequent. One plausible explanation to this fact might be a widespread stereotype about the general decline of the Western Ukrainian Humanities of those times compared to the previous era or thriving Dnipro Ukraine science in the second half of the 1920-ies. We do not try to deny the difficulties the Zbruch Ukrainians faced in their cultural life, however, we attempt to make a more profound analysis using an organisational structure of the Ukrainian science in the interwar Poland as an example.
The Analysis of Previous Researches. Only a few researchers investigated the aspects of the institutional Humanities in the interwar Poland. Among them we can name Volodymyr Potulnytskyi (Potulnytskyi, 1999), Leonid Zashkilnyak (Zashkilnyak, 2014 and Vitaliy Masnenko (Masnenko, 2001, p. 354-360). Scientific organisational activity of Dnipro emigrants in the Second Polish Republic was a subject of Andrii Portnov's monograph (Portnov, 2009). However, the abovementioned scientists were not fully consistent in highlighting the institutional problematics. Their works lack the holistic analysis of institutional history of the Ukrainian science in interwar Poland. All this determines the topicality of our research.
The purpose of the article is to reconstruct institutional organizations of the Ukrainian historical science in the Second Polish Republic.
The Statement of the Basic Material. For a start, let us review the activity of institutions that were founded in the XIXth -the beginning XXth century. The most authoritative institution of that time was Shevchenko Scientific Society (hereinafter -SSS). It entered a new period of its existence in a rather weak state of affairs. Material funds were robbed by occupants of different political beliefs, the majority of most prominent activists were outside Lviv and the afterwar communication was disrupted. Another challenge the "uncrowned Western Ukrainian Academy of Science" faced was a severe lack of a financial support for project realisation. One reason for this was the refusal of the newly created Polish state to support SSS. Thus, the Ukrainians, divided by borders and exhausted after war, could not fully carry the burden of supporting their intellectuals. To make matters worse, the Polish officials did their best to slow down the activity of SSS by authorizing police searches in its buildings, enforcing the tax burden and prohibiting the publication of school textbooks in 1923 (this was the only stable income source at that time) (Kubijovych, 1991, pp. 32-41). All these measures led to slowing down or cancelling of many expensive scientific projects, first and foremost, of archeographical editions, launched at the end of XIXth century.
Despite these unfavourable conditions, the Society continued its development. It underwent structural transformations, caused by the complications of the disciplinary field of the Ukrainian studies. For instance, it founded different committees: juridical in 1926, statistical in 1927, Shevchenko and Eastern studies in 1929, committee of ancient history of Ukraine, Source studies and Music studies in 1936. In general, almost 100 scientists worked in SSS during the period under study. The majority of them were historians, linguists, law scholars and philosophers (Naida, 1998). Among them the most active were historians, former students of Hrushevsky Lviv historical school. Those were Ivan Krypjyakevych (the head of the historical section and an editor of "Notes of SSS"), Myron Korduba (the head of Acheographical committee), Vasyl Harasymchuk, Bogdan Barvinsky, Ivan Krevetsky as well as a younger generation represented by Mykola Andrusiak, Roman Zubyk, Illia Vytanovych and the others.
In overall, during the interwar period SSS managed to publish 28 different issues of periodicals and serial publications, from fundamental "Notes of SSS" and collections of sections and committees to the scientific-popular journals "The Modern and the Past", "Old Ukraine" and "Historical notes". A real jewel of the Society was the fullest, at that time, the Ukrainian studies scientific library, the funds of which increased to 300 thousand volumes (Kubijovych, 1991, p. 39). Let us note, that apart from scientific work, SSS was supporting a vast range of important cultural educational programmes. The most important was, of course, the programme of "university courses" that became the basis of Lviv (Underground) Ukrainian University.
We should also mention that SSS collaborated with and often curated a scientific research of Country studies museums in provincial towns. Among the most active ones, those who issued their own scientific editions, were the museums "Boikivshchyna" in Sambir, "Stryvigor" in Pszemysl, "Verkhovyna" in Stryi and "Hutsulshchyna" in Kolomyia.
Stauropegion Institute, an ideological antagonist of SSS, also continued its scientific activity in Lviv. Peculiarly, the Polish officials fully supported the activity of this Moscophile institution, keeping it as a leverage against the Ukrainian cultural institutions in Galicia. Government officials launched the change of Ukrainophile directors, who were the head of the institute since World War I (Orlevych, 2009). In 1922, the institute was taken over by a conservative group of Moscophiles, loyal to Poland. It also obtained the right to publish textbooks that was taken away from SSS (Kyrychuk, 2000). The institute had its own periodical -"The Periodical of Stauropegion institute" (issued from 1923 to 1939). The publications included the history of this institution, ecclesiastical issues, the history of the past of Russophile movement and countless memoirs and literary works. Anti-Ukrainian rhetoric dominated in majority of periodical's publications.
One more Ukrainian institution from pre-war times continued its work during interwar period. It was "Andrei Sheptytskyi National Museum" founded in February 1905. At the beginning of the 1930-ies its collection included over 80 thousand items (Sventsitskyi, 1930). For the following years (1905 -1952), a museum's keeper and director was Ilarion Sventsitskyi. He was the one, who started the scientific work in this institution (Kots-Grugorchuk, 1998). The museum had its own non-periodical edition, the journal "The Chronical of Andrei Sheptytskyi national museum in Lviv" that published five issues during 1934 -1938. The edition published the works on historical, art and museum studies topics and it included remarkable works of Ilarion Sventsitskyi, Vera Sventsitska, Yaroslav Pasternak and the others.
The interwar period was marked by a rapid institutionalisation of the Ukrainian historical ecclesiastical research that, by obvious reasons, could not be conducted under the Soviet rule. In 1923, the Ukrainian Theological Scientific Institute was founded at Lviv Theological Scholarly Society. It aimed at the development of the Ukrainian theological science by organising lectures, conferences, publishing scientific works (Glynka and Chekhovych, 1934). The heads of the theological society were rectors of Lviv Theological seminary Theodosiy Halushchinski (until 1926) and Josyf Slipyi. The members of the society worked in four sections -biblical, philosophical dogmatic, historical juridical and theological juridical. At the end of the 1930-ies the society had 52 active members (Yaniv, 1970). The society published the journal "Theology", that was issued once in three months (20 editions from 1923 -1942), the monographical series "The Works of Theological Society" and founded a popular library "Theological Editions". Apart from scientific editions, the society published the articles on the popular discussions on ecclesiastical and social issues, some of them were also presented in a historical spotlight. They were published in a monthly edition "Nyva" edited by Petro Khomyn from 1933 -1939.
The Ukrainian scientific life in the interwar Poland was marked by an active participation of Dnipro intellectuals. Together with S. Petliura, they were forced to leave the Ukrainian territories (Portnov, 2009). Despite countless promises of the Polish officials to remove representatives of the Ukrainian People's Republic government that they provided in agreements with the USSR, the Ukrainian emigrants stayed and worked in the Second Polish Republic. Since 1926 they participated in creation and realisation of ideas of "Prometheus Movement", which was organised by supporters of Pilsudski. They aimed at weakening of the USSR international positions by supporting the anti-Soviet aspirations among emigrants (Komar, 2001, pp. 250-255). In this way, Ukrainian Dnipro emigrants managed to reunite in Poland, and, having benefited from government support, they implemented an intellectual potential in several scientific institutional projects. All of them deployed their activity across the border of Galicia, mainly in Warsaw, since Dnipro emigrants were not allowed to live on the Ukrainian ethnic territories.
Following the chronological order, let us begin with the Ukrainian military historical society (UMHS). Members of this society collaborated with Galician colleagues during 1920 -1939 to research versatile military historical issues. According to Zoryana Kysil, the founders of the society aimed at transforming the society into the organisational centre of military historians (Kysil, 2001). Among the members we can list the generals M. Yunakiv, V. Zmijenko, M. Vovk, a colonel M. Sadovskyi and a lieutenant-colonel V. Yevtymovych. As the regulation of the society claimed, the society had to collect the material and investigate modern history of War for Independence as well as to research centuries lasting history of Ukraine's fight for freedom and independence. Another prominent centre of development of military historical science was military scientific publishing centre "Chornomor" in Kalish that published a fundamental research and works of the Ukrainian military officials. A few examples to list: "Winter campaign" by a general M. Omelyanovych-Pavlenko, "Sich Riflemen in their fight for statehood" by a general M. Bezruchko, "Short history of the 3 rd Sich Riflemen division" by a colonel Chyzhevskyi and the others. During the long-lasting period of their existence the society published scientific and scientific popular chronicles "Military Herald", "Zaporozhets", "For Statehood", "Tabor", "Son of Ukraine", "Zaporozhska Dumka", "Get Weapons Ready", "At Ruins".
In February 1925 Studium of the Orthodox Theology started its long-lasting activity at Warsaw university (Portnov, 2006). Such famous Ukrainian historians as I. Ohienko, V. Bidnov, O. Lototskyi, V. Zaikin and D. Doroshenko collaborated with the institution. A lot of them became later the heads of historical ecclesiastical departments: I. Ohienko became the chair of Church Slavonic language and palaeography department, O. Lototskyi was the chair of the Orthodox countries in Slav countries and Romania department, V. Bidnov (and later D. Doroshenko) became the chair of General history of the Orthodox church and liturgy department. The abovementioned scholars, as well as their students, who were writing master's theses at that time, worked on versatile issues of historical ecclesiastical agenda. They published the results of their research in separate books as well as articles in the journal "ELPIS". This journal published its material in Ukrainian, Russian and Polish.
However, the most intensive scientific work was deployed by those Dnipro emigrants, who became the members of the Ukrainian scientific institute in Warsaw (USI). V. Potulnytskti and A. Portnov concluded: the organization was created in 1930 in order to implement the tasks of the abovementioned "Prometheus Movement" (Potulnytskyi, 1999, Portnov, 2004. Institutional predecessor of USI was "Higher Ukrainian courses" organised by the Ukrainian Central Committee. They established collaboration with O. Lototskyi, R. Smal-Stotskyi, M. Korduba and the others. Despite the initial plans, the Polish officials did not let USI become an educational institution and transformed it into a research centre.
O. Lototskyi, who was from Dnipro Ukraine, became the first head of the organisation, followed by R. Smal-Stotskyi from Bukovina and V. Sadovskyi from Volyn. The Galicians M. Korduba and B. Lepkyi also supported the implementation of USI's scientific programme. The Ukrainian researchers worked together with their Polish colleagues: historians Oskar Galetskyi, Martselii Gandelsman and Ya. Volinskyi.
USI's scholars mainly researched the Ukrainian political history, the history of culture, besides, they held a range of committees and seminars. For almost a decade of the functioning of the institutions, they managed to publish numerous works on the Ukrainian history and culture in 13 series of "Works". The biggest achievement of USI is, doubtlessly, 16 volumes of an impeccable academic edition of Taras Schevchenko's works (Ukrainian Scientific Institute, 1935).
A final chord of the process of creating scientific institutes was the foundation of the Ukrainian Mohyla-Mazepa Academy of Science (UM-MAS) -a little-known institution in modern Science studies (Rudnytskyi, 1999). This scientific institution was founded by the order of UPR's exile government in May 1938 in Warsaw. It was founded to continue the work of All-Ukrainian Academy of Science (AUAS), which was brutally terminated by Bolsheviks in Kyiv. It aimed at restoration of eliminated scientific publishing houses and informing foreign scientific institutions about Ukraine and the Ukrainian science. Supposedly, in order to highlight the heredity of the new Academy from AUAS, the founders chose 12 members as its first staff, just as it happened during founding of the Ukrainian Academy of Science in Kyiv. Besides, three valid members of Kyiv academy became academics -S. Smal-Stotskyi, F. Kolessa and M. Voznyak. In the Soviet state they were accused of being "bourgeois nationalists" and "fascists" and therefore, were excluded from AUAS (Hyrych, 1999). S. Smal-Stotskyi also happened to be one of the founders of AUAS. Among other founders of Mogyla-Mazepa Academy of Science there was only one historian sensu stricto -Myron Korduba. The others were the experts on the history of culture, law, art and literature. The new academy was meant to be a state institution and therefore, the order about its foundation was signed by the president of UPR in exile Andrii Livytskyi. Academy had only one department of the Ukrainian studies that had 24 chairs, each divided into research groups. The first president was Stepan Smal-Stotskyi (after August 1938 -Ivan Feshchenko-Chopivskyi), the first secretary was Andrii Yakovliv. Two years before the World War II the organisation published three volumes of "Works of the Ukrainian Studies Department" with monographs of Ya. Gordynskyi, F. Kolessa and M. Voznyak. After the beginning of the German occupation of Poland UM-MAS ceased to exist and resurrected after the war in American diaspora.
We should also mention unfinished institutional projects of the Zbruch Ukrainians, though this issue requires a more detailed research. L. Zashkilnyak found out that in autumn 1923 the Ukrainian historians decided to create the Ukrainian Historical Society, following the model of existing Polish historical society. They compiled the regulations of the society that in its core resembled the documents of other scientific and public organisations. In July 1924 the regulations of UHS, supported with all necessary documents, were filed at Lviv voivode department to obtain the permission for its registration and activity. However, the very next day the historians received a letter stating that permission was denied. The reason was appallingly absurd: the department claimed that the regulations did not correspond to the requirements of the law on the public organisations …dated 15 November 1867 (!) (Zashkilnyak, 2014, p. 129). In such a way the Polish officials blatantly demonstrated that they would not allow the creation of another centre of the Ukrainian cultural life. Other institutional initiatives fell short their realisation as well.
The Conclusions. In conclusion we would like to note that the Ukrainian scientists in the interwar Poland sometimes collaborated with the Polish government, however, they mostly opposed its national cultural policy. Regardless the dynamics of their relationship, they managed to adapt to the existing conditions quite well. They preserved the institutional potential of the Ukrainian Humanities, while adequately reacting to social political and cultural challenges. Despite a chronical poverty and lack of financial resources, they initiated the foundation of new organisational structures, that were designed to moderate the most dynamic branches of the Ukrainian studies. The Ukrainian science of those times was divided between Warsaw and Lviv. Unfortunately, despite the active communication between Galician and Dnipro scholars in emigration, they did not manage to establish a solid interinstitutional collaboration. As a result, some organisational structures just obtained their "twins", which, if we consider scarce financial and human resources, led to unjustified expenses. Moreover, it led to incoherence in scientific projects and thus, to personal conflicts. Nevertheless, those institutions were of a crucial importance, as the emigrants later relocated them to the countries of the "free world". That helped the Ukrainian science to survive the communist regime and preserve the institutional memory.